Compete to survive, cooperate to exist: the sovereignty paradox at the heart of Europe’s defence industry

2026-06-22 · Source: Artificial intelligence (AI) – The Conversation · Field: Business & Management — Corporate Strategy & Leadership, International Business & Trade, Project & Product Management · Depth: Intermediate, medium

Summary

The collapse of the €100-billion Future Combat Air System (FCAS), a joint fighter jet program between France and Germany, highlights a critical challenge in European strategic autonomy: managing "coopetition." On June 11, eight German aerospace and defence companies, joined by Spanish industry, formed "Team Gen 6" to build a sixth-generation fighter without France, just three days after FCAS was abandoned. This failure, despite the program's aim to embody European sovereignty, is attributed to a lack of robust governance architecture for coopetitive projects involving competing firms and states. In contrast, the €13-billion European satellite navigation system Galileo, launched in 2001, succeeded due to the European Space Agency's (ESA) neutral orchestration, effectively managing knowledge sharing among competitors like Airbus Defence and Space, Thales Alenia Space, and OHB. The FCAS breakdown underscores that while coopetition is necessary for large-scale, frontier technology projects, it is structurally prone to collapse without proper mechanisms to limit undesired knowledge transfers and resolve disputes.

Key takeaway

For European policymakers and defense industry executives weighing future strategic autonomy projects, you must prioritize establishing robust, neutral governance structures for "coopetition." Without mechanisms to manage knowledge transfer, distribute gains equitably, and resolve disputes, your initiatives risk the same fragmentation and collapse seen with FCAS. Learn from the European Space Agency's successful orchestration of Galileo to build the institutional infrastructure necessary for sustained, large-scale collaboration across competing national and industrial interests.

Key insights

Coopetition in strategic European projects requires robust, neutral governance to prevent collapse due to competing national and industrial interests.

Principles

• National champions cannot alone sustain frontier technology investments.
• Coopetition inherently generates tensions over knowledge transfer.
• Governance architecture is critical for successful coopetitive projects.

Method

Implement structural separation for collaborative and competitive activities, establish formal protocols for knowledge sharing and ring-fencing, and appoint a neutral orchestrator to manage disputes and ensure equitable distribution of costs and gains.

In practice

• Study Galileo's governance model for large-scale projects.
• Assess knowledge transfer risks in cross-national collaborations.
• Prioritize neutral third-party orchestration for complex partnerships.

Topics

• European Defence Industry
• Coopetition Management
• Strategic Autonomy
• FCAS Program
• Galileo Satellite System
• Governance Architecture

Best for: Executive, Policy Maker, Consultant

Related on AIssential

• Scaling for sovereignty: How EU policy is reshaping Europe’s deeptech playbook — EU policy is driving deeptech innovation towards strategic autonomy and green transition across Europe.
• How success turns allies into competitors — Success born from unity often contains the seeds of internal rivalries and eventual fragmentation.
• Teachers aren’t getting formal guidance on AI, poll finds — Rapid AI evolution and escalating global conflicts demand integrated governance and adaptive strategies to manage both technological and geopolitical risks.
• The US state apparatus acting less like a neutral referee of markets and more like a growth function for a particular sector. “Take our stack, because our diplomats will fight your sovereignty rules.” — US statecraft increasingly functions as an industrial policy, promoting American AI and cloud services globally through diplomatic and development channels.
• EU Unveils Sweeping Tech Sovereignty Push, Balancing Autonomy with Openness — Europe's tech sovereignty strategy balances reducing foreign dependency with fostering domestic capacity and open markets.
• Europe, wake up! You Can’t Be a Superpower on Someone Else’s Servers (Ep. 304) — Europe's reliance on foreign tech for critical infrastructure is a political failure, not an engineering impossibility.

Open in AIssential →

Editorial summary, takeaway, and curation by AIssential. Original article published by Artificial intelligence (AI) – The Conversation.